Thursday, June 17, 2010

For my ENGL 295 class, we were also asked to compare conventional research writing with the kind of blog research writing that we have been doing for the last month or so. Well, here's what I think are the advantages and limitations of each type:

Conventional Paper Writing:

Perhaps the main thing that is different in a conventional research paper from a blog post is the tone. You simply have to learn to present yourself well, and you have to learn how to take a position and defend it. I think this kind of thing is valuable. Also, sometimes I think it is kind of nice to have a finished product, a paper that is whole and done. This kind of writing I think does "mediate literature" in that it does require that you take a stance and closely analyze the work. Sometimes in blogging, it is easy to be wishy-washy in what your are trying to prove.

BUT.... Ok, now on to limitations. With a conventional research paper, you really can't learn to hone your ideas. You can't get feedback. You turn in your nice little paper copy to your professor and then, well, either you did well, or you didn't. Where's the room for growth? Also, what exactly is the point for that research paper? I did a killer analysis of Emily Bronte's influence on the poetry of Emily Dickinson for my American Literary History class last semester. On the bottom of my paper, my teacher, Keith Lawrence, stated that the paper would make a fantastic (hold your breath) MASTER'S THESIS. Um, that's HUGE. Maybe not, but it was a big deal to me at the time. But now that paper is kind of just sitting on my computer at home, or perhaps in the depths of Professor Lawrence's office, and no one will ever see it again (unless I resurrect the topic when I go to grad schoool). So, are tradition research papers valuable? Yes. But could there be something more beneficial at times? Yes, I think so.

Research Blog Writing

Ok, I've already blogged here about how the course objectives for this class have helped me in honing my research blog. This kind of research blogging allows a student to publish exploratory musings on what they are thinking for their topic. I think that this kind of fluid thesis formation is a really good thing. It allows a student to get feedback they wouldn't necessarily have gotten. For example, my professor kind of disagreed with my thesis about online identity, but in disagreeing, he pointed me to really good sources that helped me keep some of my fundamental ideas, but also allowed me to tweek what I was thinking so that everything made sense. This brings me to another strong point of blog writing. In a research paper, I would typically use the first couple of sources that popped up on BYU's website, or google scholar. On a blog, people with real skills in this field can point me to sources that are top-notch. Here is an example of that. Also here and here are examples of how I tried to talk to people outside the class. This kind of interaction is so necessary to meaningful learning. My classmates did a really good job of reaching out to people throughout the semester: look at James' blogs and Neals' blogs for examples.

The learning objectives for BYU state that our classes should be "intellectually enlarging, character building" and "lead to a life of learning and service." Do blogs help accomplish that better than a research paper? Yes, I sort of think so. After all, are my "life-long" pursuits going to involve sitting in a vacuum while typing on a screen and then presenting a nice little printed copy of a research paper? Nope. I need to learn how to incorporate criticism. This is perhaps the most "intellectually enlarging" thing I can learn that will really help me my whole life long. I want to be a Mom. Ok, so I have to learn to realize how my kids are responding to how I try to teach them. I want to be able to help teach and serve in my church. Ok, so I need to be able to present things not in a "scholarly, stuffy" way, but in a way that people will really be interested in who I am and what I know to be true.

So that's my conclusion on this class experiment, I guess. I have learned to love this class. It has been beneficial, forcing me to learn in a new way. Blogs are good things. So are research papers at times. But blogs are perhaps more meaningful.

So, as I made clear in my first post, this blog came into being because it was an assignment for my ENGL 295 class at BYU. Now, for that same class, I am going to analyze one of my classmates' blogs based on the criteria. I'd also like to take a look at how effective that criteria was in helping my classmates and I develop our blogs.

Stacie... Tea Party Movement and Women's Suffrage.

Stacie Farmer in my class did her research blog based on comparing and contrasting the woman's suffrage movement (as is portrayed in Iron-Jawed Angels) with the Tea Party Movement, as well as other online protest. Stacie's main arguments are laid out in three "hub" posts, which are spaced between other posts of more variety or expository nature. Here thesis is really in the last of these hub posts. The thesis maybe could have come earlier in the semester, but I think it works where it is too.

Strong PointsDevelopment/Post Variety: It is easy to see how Stacie's ideas took form. She covers everything from Mormon Feminist Housewives to business blogging and then settles on discussing the Tea Party Movement. I think that this shows that Stacie worked hard to really see what direction she could go in. This is the kind of self-directed learning we talked about in class. Stacie also documents her research on scholars and her efforts in contacting those scholars. Again, I think this shows how she was willing to take initiative and also covers the criteria point of Interactivity and Community. I also think Stacie does a good job of focusing on correct Length. This is something I have (and continue to) struggle with, so I appreciate that Stacie's posts are not too long, but do give enough valid information to be engaging. I also think Stacie does a good job incorporating media, such as pictures and video, to her blog. One thing I noticed from the beginning in looking at Stacie's blog was her ability to incorporate Links into her discussion. Sometimes these links go to other sites, and sometimes they go to videos. It's not always perfectly clear what the links are going to be too, but the links are always pertinent and beneficial.

Just a Few Suggestions The first of Stacie's more expository blog posts does deal primarily with her literature. However, I think her Analysis could have been a bit more in depth. She maybe should have drawn more conclusions from Iron-Jawed Angels than just the fact that the Women's Right Movement was very physical in nature. This goes along with the points of Currency/History and Sources. As I read Stacie's blog this past semester, and as I'm looking at it now, I don't remember there necessarily being a great deal of scholarly support for her arguments. However, she did get in contact with a scholar she found on Amazon, which does add weight to her ideas.

The Criteria I do think that the criteria listed here are good tools to analyze and provide focus for our research blogs. I will be perfectly honest. When I realized that this class was going to focus on new media, which was going to mean that my classmates and I would be blogging, I was a bit worried about the material I was going to learn. But, as my classmates and I followed the criteria, we were able to learn about new media while engaging with critical texts while also coming in contact with real people studying our topics. Not only that, but incorporating media and a "personality" on our blogs is going to prep us for the future, where things like that really do matter. The only criteria that may be missing from the list is the need to comment on our classmates blogs throughout the semester. This kind of "gift economy" attitude is incorporated in the criteria through such things as Community, but we talked a lot in class about commenting on our classmates' blogs, so it makes sense that this would be spelled out in the class criteria as well.

At the end of today, Spring semester at BYU will draw to a close. I will go back to my apartment, finish packing all of the random things that I forgot I owned, and tomorrow my Dad will show up in Provo, ready to drive with me back to sunny Mesa.

Can you see the light at the end?

I don't mean to be cheesy or anything, but is this the end? What if it's not? What if this blog continues to serve the purpose that I hoped it might in my first post? Has this blog been useful? Have my key ideas been a meaningful contribution in the online discussion about identity?

ENGL 295 Learning OutcomesFirst off, has this blog helped me in gleaning everything I could from my ENGL 295 class? Here's the outcomes for the class:1. Read literary, critical, and online texts analytically and2. Find and evaluate secondary sources. I think I've been able to do these two, with discussions of literary texts like Joy Luck Club and How to Tame a Wild Tongue. I also have been able to look at critical texts, about both Joy Luck Club and online identity issues. As for looking at online texts, I have looked at more informal sources, such as online book reviews, as well as scholarly blogs.

3. Develope collaborative compositional processes. I have tried to use the comments others have left me, as well as the material they've suggested. Here and here are examples.

4. Write a traditional research paper. Did it! (although it wasn't really on this blog)

5. Engage in self-directed learning. This, I think, is my greatest accomplishment. I came up with researching this topic on my own, and I took it in the direction I wanted, and I decided who I agreed with, and who I disagreed with, and whose ideas were valuable. I can't really provide a link for this.... the blog in itself shows the process. Feel free to shift through posts and see how my own ideas emerged.

Good blog? What the teacher wanted?After my ENGL 295 class started working on these blogs, my professor, Gideon Burton, started his own Literary Process Blog with a list of what he would like our blogs to be like. There's quite a few areas of criteria, so I'll just touch on a few. I think that towards the beginning of this blog, I struggled a little on length. Sometimes I rambled (forgive me. I'm an English major). I also didn't really add too much media toward the beginning, such as pictures. Perhaps Focus was a problem toward the beginning, and some of my posts would be a bit confusing if read alone. But I think I have learned, and gotten better at posting. I have a good variety, touching on book reviews, profiles of scholars, data visualization, and event-centered posts. I think I've gotten pretty good at linking posts together and forming cohesion. And I do think I have a good amount of quantity here, with discussions that are grounded in both the current online conversation as well as the larger context of ideas related to my subject of identity. I also was able to interact with other people in the online world through this blog. See here and here for more about my interactions with others.

Back to the Thesis, One Last TimeSo, yes, I am going to restate my thesis for you. I think that the online world allows identity formation, experimentation, and active creation to take place. Through these multiple identities, a stronger and more whole sense of self is formed for an individual. We create a beneficial singular identity that contains multiplicity. Now, am I absolutely positive that this thesis is set in stone? Not by a long shot. Like I stated above, the greatest triumph (too strong of language? deal with it) of this blog is that it was, and IS, a process, where I can open up my learning. I've been trying to do a lot of linking on this post looking back at all of my work so far, but, again, I can't really provide a link for this. My ideas have become more focused over time, and have sometimes changed as I came in contact with other people. Maybe in a way, this blog is the greatest indicator of my own thesis. Multiple faces of my learning have been presented, as well as mutliple sides of myself. But I hope that all of these wonderful multiplicities can be reconciled together in a way that allows others to get to know me better, and allows me to better get to know myself.

So, Spring semester churns to a close at BYU. But don't worry, it's not the end! The light at the end of the tunnel is really the beginning!

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

It's kinda weird what pops up when you search for images tagged "Postmodernism." Weird, but cool:

This picture fits in with Postmodernism because under this theory, interpretation is left open. There is no set, specific meaning, and there are multiple ways to view one thing. Tracking Down Postmodernist IdeasYesterday, after I blogged about Zach Waggoner's book and his ideas about identity and video game avatars, I decided to take a closer look at other things that Waggoner might be working on. This was the idea of my Professor, Gideon Burton, who helped me find an online syllabus for an upper-level English class Waggoner is teaching at ASU, Video Game Theory. Looking at the syllabus, I noticed that Waggoner had assigned reading from Sherry Turkle called "Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet." Turkle is a sociologist and the Professor of Social Studies and Technology at MIT. I read an overview of her arguments in this book, and ran into some interesting ideas, not all of which I agree with.

Turkle's StudiesTurkle basically argues that a computer screen allows a user to connect to the events on the screen and "suspend disbelief." But here's the catch. Turkle believes that this suspension of disbelief lasts after a person is done looking at a computer. A computer user's real life becomes entangled in Postmodernism as well, and "reality becomes what is referred to as "RL" -- "Real Life" -- which is just another role-playing game." In effect, Turkle is arguing that the internet and computers render people incapable of believing in the reality of, well, anything. This total lack of meaning and comprehensibility is very Postmodernist, and so it makes a lot of sense that Turkle also argues that "a unified self is...fiction."

Room for Reconciliation? So, while Turkle does definitely argue against any semblance to a singularity of identity, which I believe can exist by containing multiplicity, I do think that my ideas and Turkle's are not mutually exclusive. Turkle said that, through the internet, "we do not feel compelled to rank or judge the elements of our multiplicity. We do not feel compelled to exclude what does not fit." The author of the overview stated "once that is accomplished, the self is prepared to play out all its fantasies..." Hm. So you have here an acceptance of multiple identities, which then leads to a "self" that is capable of making choices. Sounds pretty close to my original thesis about online identity. Who knew that a Postmodernist sociologist and I would ever agree?

Little Side RantNow that I've found a bit of agreement between my ideas and those of Sherry Turkle, I do want to highlight some of the ways in which we disagree. Both Turkle and I think there can be some blurring between online and offline self, but I think that this can be a positive thing, because it means that people are, in a way, trying to stay close to their offline selves, even if they are utilizing multiple identities to do so. But Turkle's arguments lead to a sense of "apathy" where we "cease asking how we are being manipulated by simulations." I argue that the internet allows us to be the manipulaTORS, not the manipulaTED. That's a big difference. Also, like I've stated above, Turkle sees the internet as a place where there is an "effort to "deconstruct" or "deactualize" reality." I think that identity experimentation can strengthen offline identity, not render it completely meaningless. Turkles ideas may lead to belief in "a world in which little is demanded of us; in which the stakes of life aren't so large, and the consequences of action aren't so final."

I don't agree with that. I believe our actions matter. This is why I argue for active identity creation.

Some Preliminary ConclusionsAnd I guess that will end up being my main argument. As I ponder wrapping up some of these conclusions later this week (with the knowledge that I haven't really finished learning everything or deciding what I think about all facets of the online identity issue), I know that there's one thing I think: the internet does not render us powerless. We must be active people, capable people, responsible people. We form an identity out of multiple facets because from learning and forming who we are, we become responsible for the overall identity we create.

Waggoner first differentiates between Modernist and Postmodernist theories of identity. Basically, modernists believe that there can be singular identity, or a sense of identity "continuity over time and space." Identity is integrated; it is not fragmented. PostmodernistsBut most video game scholars are apparently Postmodernists. I've never had much patience for Postmoderists. They always seemed to me to be a bunch of scholars groaning about the absolute total lack of meaning in a horribly coreless world.... That kind of pessimism seems a bit juvenile to me, actually. But in this context, their claims are interesting and valid. One Postmodernist theorist states that "the knowing self is...NEVER finished, whole, simply there and original..." Hm. That doesn't really match up with my theories on this. But, then, lo and behold, Waggoner states that this same scholar goes on to describe "self-identity as consisting of many distinct and unique parts (division) that nevertheless share enough (merger) to be able to join together." It is absolutely crucial to the formation of identity that "these different aspects of the self" are "able to 'see' each other."

Now Back to My Thesis Hey! Guess what! That's what I've been arguing! This is like Born Digital, a text I've used before, where Palfrey claims that the online world allows our multiplicites of identity to be easily seen by others, and therefore more easily reconcilable into one complete whole.

How do Video Games Relate?Not all of the scholars in this book agree on what identity is, which is fairly common enough. But video games do tend to fall toward a Postmodern theory of identity. For example, avatars in a game can be recreated, or can "rise again" after they have already died once. New games can be started. Video game levels allow players to attain a sense of accomplishment while also having more possibilities of identity formation in the future. And because a video game is like a story that players can actually create rather than just consume, identity is better able to be created than just sort of assumed (I blogged more about identity creation here). All of these things add up to support a Postmodernist theory of Identity, where identity is multiple.

Back to My Thesis...AgainBut, these multiple identities lead to the creation of an identity that is "capable of fluid transformations but is grounded in coherence and a moral outlook. It is multiple but integrated." Postmodernists insist that this kind of identity cannot be called "unitary" by any means. Well, if that's what they want to say, that's fine with me. "Integrated" and "coherent" are enough to support my original thesis that mutliple identities online, such as those formed in playing video games, can be all contained within something of a semblance to a singular identity.

Thursday, June 10, 2010

"Identity is the essential core of who we are as individuals, the conscious experience of the self inside."

This is a quote by Kaufman, an American psychologist who, I admit, I know next to nothing about. But I found this saying while reading Gloria Anzaldua's "How to Tame a Wild Tongue."

"How to Tame a Wild Tongue" is a chapter from Anzaldua's book Borderland/La Frontera, the New Mestiza. While I don't agree with all of Anzaldua's sentiments, I do think that this is a very valid piece of literature to discuss some of my themes and ideas about multiple identities reconciling into one online. For Anzaldua, identity is very closely tied with language. I love some of the passion in her writing... "How do you tame a wild tongue, train it to be quiet, how do you bridle and saddle it? How do you make it lie down?" Anzaldua grew up in the Tex-Mex culture of the borderlands, a place where identity is defined as being blurred between spaces. As a Chicana, Anzaldua grew up with a multiplicity of languages, a multiplicity of identities. She learned standard English, slang English, standard Spanish, Mexican Spanish, North Mexican Spanish dialect, many regional versions of Chicano Spanish, Tex-Mex, and Pachuco (which is sort of a rebellious spanish-like language that came about in the 1930s and 40s).

That's a lot of languages. A lot of identities. But Anzaldua does argue that this multiplicity of languages can be used to find a singular identity. She says that

for a people who cannot entirely identify with either standard (formal, Castilian) Spanish nor standard English, what recourse is left to them but to create their own language? A language which they can connect their identity to, one capable of communicating the realities and values true to themselves--a language with terms that are neither espanol ni ingles, but both.

I like that word "create"... I think it works in really well with what I am thinking about identity online. We create our own identities. We see the multiplicity, and, just as a Chicano language was "created," we create a singular identity that contains multiplicity.

Like I said, I don't agree with everything Anzaldua claims. But I really like parts of this text. I guess I'm interested because my mom is an elementary school teacher in Arizona, my beautiful home state, for kids who do not test proficient in English. She has about twenty of the most adorable Hispanic kiddos you've ever seen. I also love this text simply because I love language. Many times, Anzaldua uses Spanish in her text. The first time I read it, I was able to use my high school AP skills to understand most of it. The rest was translated for me by Greg, the very cute boy I am dating who returned in December from an LDS mission to Madrid. Sometimes he would pause and crinkle his eyebrows, and then shrug. "I don't know that word," he'd whisper at the library table in Periodicals. "Must be a Mexican word. They've come up with their own little things to say."

We all come up with our own little things to say, our own little things to do. We make our identity out of all these little things together. Wonderful, isn't it?

Wednesday, June 9, 2010

A few days ago, I was talking to my professor Gideon Burton about my project and ideas regarding how the multiplicity of identity online lends itself to the creation of a more unified sense of self in the offline world. Dr. Burton referred me to a series of three blogs by James Goldberg, a graduate student at BYU: Caucajewmexdian, Mormon Midrashim, and My Life and Hard Times. I took a look, and there was some interesting stuff and wonderful writing. So, I asked James a few questions. He not only commented on my blog, he wrote a whole post detailing a few of the limitations of my metaphor comparing ethnic minority identity and online identity. Check it out!

The more I blog, the more I am just very pleased with the capabilities of this wonderful digital world we live in. How amazing that two people, who never would have met in "real life," are now able to collaborate and discuss these ideas with each other.

Musings of a College Kid

About Me

Grew up in the beautiful Mesa, AZ. Married to the fantastic and totally hot Goyito. Graduated in English from BYU with focus in 19th Century American lit. Currently hanging out in Jacksonville, Florida.